"I disapprove of wine with breakfast."
Translation:Ich bin gegen Wein zum Frühstück.
Ich schreibe 'Ich bin gegen wein mit Frühstück' und das ist nicht richtig? Wie ist das?
zum Frühstück is somewhat idiomatic, as in it's simply how
with breakfast is translated even though it is literally translated as
to the breakfast which doesn't make sense in English.
Hmm... I thought that "zum Frühstück" means "for breakfast". Notice the difference between "wine for breakfast" (wine is the main breakfast ingredient) and "wine with breakfast" (wine accompanies your otherwise normal breakfast). Does German not make any distinction between these two? (And if it does, then how?)
In some previous lessons someone already pointed out that with verb "sein", preposition mit does not work well, especially without adverbs and adjectives. There are some rare cases where you can find such examples like in Bible, but in general with "sein" you use preposition bei, so I wonder if it would work to write ...beim Frühstück instead of ...zum Frühstück?
Wein beim Frühstück ~ The bottle of wine stands next to you on the table, but there is no must to open and to drink it.
Wein zum Frühstück ~ You should drink a glas of wine in addition to the food you eat at/for breakfast.
I don't understand what you want to ask. "The bottle stands next to you and of course you can drink the wine in both sentence fragments. It is a totally different situation to compare an "object + beim" or a "verb + beim".
Your sentence has two possible meanings.
1) One does not read while one is eating. ~Essen as activity-noun 2) One does not read while food is served or while one has dinner. ~Essen as food
So, what is the difference between these two sentences?: Wir essen beim Wasser. Wir essen zum Wasser.
In my opinion it is absolutely correct sentence. It would be incorrect, if the English sentence was - I disapprove of wine BY breakfast or I disapprove of breakfat with wine. From my point of view both current correct answers by Duolingo are wrong.
I plugged this sentence into my German translator and it said, "Ich missbillige Wein mit Fruhstuck". It seems to make sense, why is it wrong?
Not sure how to write it correctly with "missbillige", but if you translate "Ich missbillige Wein mit Fruhstuck" word by word it would be "I disapprove wine with breakfast". I believe it needs a preposition in German, just like it needs one in English.
It accepts "Ich missbillige Wein beim Frühstück". There are some verbs where the preposition is "built-in". Another is "bezahlen". The problem seems to be that "mit" isn't the right preposition to say "wine with breakfast".
If I wanted to say 'I DON'T disapprove of wine with breakfast', where would the 'nicht' go in the sentence? "Ich bin gegen Wien zum Fruhstuck nicht"? (Sorry for missing umlauts).
Because let's face it, wine with breakfast is where it is at.
"Ich bin für Wein zum Frühstück." oh, you want to have wine. Suddenly you add a "dagegen" - all Germans get confused. It does not work. We pull the "gegen" or "dagegen" more to the sentence begin.
- Ich bin gegen Wein zum Frühstück.
- Ich bin dagegen, dass es Wein zum Frühstück gibt.
You see you need a subordinated clause to use "dagegen + wine".
I'm confused. This is the first time I've seen the word "gegen". The question was a multiple choice, so I couldn't look at the hints without coming here to the discussion. The hints say that "gegen" means "compared with". Where does the "disapprove" come from?
Is this discussion active? most of the discussions are for many years ago and there is not any answer to new questions!
I believe that the sentence in English should be: "I am against wine for breakfast." because "with" is "mit"
I understand what you're saying, but, unfortunately, good translations between German and English can rarely be so literal that you can actually make this argument. Especially with prepositions, which are often used differently in German than in English. This is actually a good example of that, because the German version uses "zum", a version of "zu dem". You wouldn't suggest an English version of "I am against wine to the breakfast", right?
Now, as to the question of "for" or "with" in the English translation, I actually think that "with" is probably better here, because "for" implies (to me anyway) that the one and only item I consumed for breakfast was wine. But really they mean they don't approve of drinking wine along with whatever else is being served. In English, I think "with" better expresses that.
can you summarize the difference mit and bei? why use beim Fruhstuck? I always confuse
Yeah I wonder the same to.
Anyway .. bei" means only "in the near of stc.", or "at", so it expresses only an abode.
"mit" means can mean using sth. or joining someones activity.
So we can say "Ich lebe bei meiner Mutter.", since I live in the same flat or hous like my mother. but we can also say "Ich lebe mit meiner Mutter.", since she (the mother) is also living in the flat.
"To the breakfast" contains correct grammar, but no native English speaker would ever say "I disapprove of wine to the breakfast."
I should have been more precise. "With breakfast" and "for breakfast" are both grammatically correct although the meanings are different. "Wine with breakfast" means drinking wine with the meal while "wine for breakfast" means that the wine is the meal. As TimothyGeek says, "to the breakfast" is not something a native speaker would say.
That makes sense, but another question on Duolingo translates "bread for lunch" to "Brot zum Mittagessen." So I still don't understand how to differentiate between "for breakfast" and "with breakfast" in German.
"Wine with breakfast" and "wine for breakfast" have two very different meanings in American English.
Can you explain that, please, for non English native users (if we want to get better in German with Duo, we have to get better in English)
"Wine with breakfast" is saying that along with whatever else you had for breakfast, you drank some wine. "Wine for breakfast" is saying that your whole breakfast, or at least the main part of it, was wine.
Hm. Another reason to be suspicious of 'zum', given that another sentence in the exercise was 'Wir essen Eier zum Frühstück' - clearly 'for'. Does German make this distinction?